- "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~Benjamin Franklin
On Facebook, My Liberal Democrat Doctor nephew posted a photo of a seemingly offensive sign, with accompanying text, taken at the most recent tea party demonstration in Washington DC:
The sign he was referring to is the "If Brown can't stop it a Browning can" sign shown above.The first comment made to his post was a sympathetic,
"these people are crazy. Truly, in the most literal sense of the word."Whereupon I responded(without thinking it out),
"And I suppose that threatening the citizenry with Prison time if they refuse to accept the Government Health care is sane?"My nephew then proceeded to deconstruct my argument with,
"A protestor threatening to shoot someone if that's what it takes to stop the healthcare bill is more insane than threatening prison for those who fail to pay the tax penalty assessed for refusal to buy health insurance, yes.In essence, he is correct.
I say that, even though i(sic) don't love the idea of the government requiring people to purchase anything"
Now, I love my nephew and indeed, my whole family, so the exchange left a bitter taste in my mouth. That is why, at 3:30 in the morning, I lay awake in bed with the disturbing feeling that I should have responded more appropriately. So, here, on my blog, I now present my rather lengthy rejoinder to my nephew's comment and subsequent argument:
Kevin (that's his name), I apologize for my somewhat knee-jerk reaction to your post earlier. Certainly offering a justification for what some over-rambunctious tea party attendees do doesn't, as my parents often reminded me, make their actions proper.
Two wrongs really don't make a right.
That said, I really don't have to point out the difference between one or two solitary citizens expressing their frustrations with the Government, and the President, along with some highly influential Democrat leaders wielding their immense powers to intimidate the very people they are supposed to be defending, do I?
I will submit, however, that you may be mis-interpreting the point the attendees are attempting to make.
Mere slogans on a sign don't begin to describe the extent of the frustration felt by the majority of Americans over these intrusive health care reform proposals.
Although I understand I can't speak to what the author of the slogan may have had in mind when he penned it, I would interpret it differently than how it has obviously been perceived by you and others.
I believe the tea party attendee who held the offending sign aloft may be expressing a willingness to defend his liberty by the use of a gun if necessary.
I am referring to the same spirit that created this country in her infancy. Remember, the American revolution didn't start with violence. It began even before those 56 brave men affixed their signatures to the Declaration of Independence.
Were the words on that solitary sheet of parchment all that was needed to secure liberty and freedom for the thousands of oppressed colonists?
Absolutely not!
Ultimately, the words on that document had to be enforced with the use of guns before King George finally released his oppressive hold over our forefathers.
The tea party attendees in question are probably just attempting to send the message that Americans will not stand idly by while our freedoms and liberty are being methodically stripped away.
This, I submit, may be the clumsy motivation behind the offensive signs.
Right or wrong, we cannot simply dismiss this as merely some right wing gun nut with murder in mind.
Many Americans, (Democrats included) feel this health care reform agenda is just the beginning of an unprecedented grab for power.
Kevin, you accidentally touched upon the crux of my personal objection to the health care legislation in your response to my comment:
"[I] don't love the idea of the government requiring people to purchase anything"Personally, I don't have as much a problem with the possible increase of taxes to pay for this reform as I do with the sheer impertinence of the Government telling me they have a right to decide for me what health care I should have, whether I want it or not.
Let me decide that for myself, thank you.
*I'm not calling my Nephew stupid. He definitely is not. It's just a catchy title for the post.
8 comments:
And now we here claims that racial epithets were thrown at black members of Congress by Tea partiers outside the Capitol, and that one was even spit on. Except, even though there must be a thousand cameras (media, cell phone, etc.) in the area, there's no visual or audio evidence of the merit of these charges. Liberal always use this tactic. They hate "McCarthyism," but they use it whenever necessary.
One of my favorite quotes by Ben Franklin!
This is nothing new, they mandate vaccines. Of course you can claim a religious waiver, but some states make you jump through hoops to do it.
They started this intrusion a long time ago.
This makes me sick
It appears hypocritical though because the previous administration made unprecedented increases in federal control in education, domestic security, and yes even healthcare. No one in the conservative movement was complaining that the Medicare Part D coverage was a new expansion of federal power. What did Talk Radio have to say about No Child Left Behind? Even today Republicans are proposing bills saying that the Executive can declare anyone, even an American citizen on America soil and enemy combatant and detain them indefinitely without legal representation or constitutional rights.
The healthcare bill requires everyone to purchase healthcare coverage because everyone want insurance companies to continue to make a profit plus they want to outlaw things like preexisting conditions.
well if you require insurance companies to take all applicants, What's to keep people from only buying insurance when they get sick and dropping coverage all the other times? So everyone is required to always maintain a policy, that get's insurance companies 30-million new clients and will let them maintain a profit while accepting all applicants.
BenT when the medical crisis hits I'm sure you'll forget all about how the Democrats caused it. Just as I'm sure you forgot how the Democrats caused the housing crisis, gas crisis etc . . . .
What do you see as the medical crisis Edwin? Is it when 45,000 people a year are dying because they can't get care? Or perhaps it's when 10% of all bankruptcies are caused by catastrophic illness? Or maybe it's the health care industry's rising rates swallowing the entire American economy? Are the medical crisis you predict? Because I'm sorry to tell ya Bubba, but we're already there.
Republicans had control of both Congress and the White House. If they felt the need to do something they could have. Democrats saw a national need and Barack Obama and lots of Dem candidates ran on a platform of reforming health care. This is them delivering on a campaign promise.
This bill may not be the perfect response to our nation's health care problems. It may not be what conservatives would have done (although many of the ideas in the bill were originally proposed by moderate Republicans). But it is a first step. If it doesn't work in five-ten years we'll change it.
If republicans wanted a better bill to start with, then they should have done more than just reflexively oppose the entire idea of reforming health care. The path we were on is unsustainable.
the vast majority of our county has health insurance and likes it. This will end in crisis and you will still be spouting nonsense about Republicans and ignoring the damage the Democrats have done.
You're a faithful drone and a useful idiot.
One thing I have not seen addressed is the religious freedom issue. Specifically will the government force those who for religious reasons refuse medical treatment, to purchase insurance for said treatment. Or will they just be taxed/penalized for their religious beliefs?
Post a Comment